EVOLUTION OF RTI

ABSTRACT

The Right to Information Act,2005 was a milestone in India’s journey towards good governance. This basic human right empowers the citizens of India to freely access information, ask questions and be a part in the decision-making process. It is one of the acts that was enacted by the government due to the pressure created by the people. For over 9 years, the people from diverse levels of society campaigned for the implementation of a law that would grant them the right to seek and receive information from the public authorities. With its implementation the Colonial Acts such as the official Secrets Act, Indian Evidence Act and the Civil Service Code of Conduct Rules, which contain provisions that restrict the Fundamental Right to Information has now become irrelevant. This article tries to highlight that history and how the act has evolved since its inception.

KEYWORDS: - Right to Information Act, transparency, corruption, Freedom of Information Act

INTRODUCTION

Modern political democracy is a system of governance in which rulers are held accountable for their actions in the public realm by citizens, acting indirectly through the competition and cooperation of their elected representatives.[1] Democracy requires accountability and transparency of information for a corruption free government. In a Parliamentary Government, it is axiomatic that citizens have a right to know and seek information about the government they elected. In Indian Constitution, Freedom of speech and expression that is enriched in article 19, is the lifeblood of any democracy. To debate and vote, to assemble and protest, to worship, to ensure justice for all, these all rely upon the unrestricted flow of speech and information.[2] To claim their right, the people of India went through a long struggle for 9 years. Consequently, the RTI Act was enacted. The then President, Dr. A.P.J Abdul Kalam, gave assent to the bill and the nation burst in uproar for this historic landmark legislation. According to the personnel ministry’s data, a total of 1,59,107 applications were filed under the Act between April 22, 2013, and November 12, 2021.[3]

JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS

The first clearly articulated comment on the issue of right of the people to know about the functioning of the government from a senior functionary of the state was made by Justice K.K. Mathew in his Supreme Court ruling in the case of State of UP vs Raj Narain in 1975 where he said, “In a government...where all the agents of the public must be responsible for their?conduct,?there?can?be?but?few?secrets.?The people... have a right to?know?every?public?act, everything that is done in a public way, by their public functionaries... The responsibility of officials to explain?or to?justify?their acts?is?the?chief?safeguard?against?oppression?and?corruption.”[4] Another landmark judgement that safeguarded people’s right to know was S.P.Gupta vs President Of India And Ors. Justice P.N. Bhagwati stated that “No democratic government can survive without accountability and the basic postulate of accountability is that the people should have information about the functioning of the government. It is only if people know how government is functioning that they can fulfil the role which democracy assigns to them and make democracy a really effective participatory democracy.”[5] In 1986, the Honorable Supreme Court in the landmark judgement of Mr. Kulwal v/s Jaipur Municipal Corporation stated?“Under Article 19(a) of the Constitution there exists the right of freedom of speech. Freedom of speech is based on the foundation of the freedom of right to know.”[6]

?THE JOURNEY

The first struggle brewed in the state of Rajasthan in the 1990s. Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan (MKSS), a non-party political organisation was formed. After few years, MKSS developed Jan Sunwais, public hearings to hold local officials accountable. Jan Sunwais led to the emergence of four major demands of the rural poor, those being: (1) Transparency of panchayat functioning; (2) accountability of officials; (3) social audit; and (4) redressal of grievances.[7]. During 1996, several intellectuals, academics, journalists, activists, and professionals gathered and formed NCPRI (National Campaign for People’s Right to Information). Its aim was to develop a draft RTI bill. Under the chairmanship of Justice P B Sawant, a draft was prepared. While in Rajasthan, after five years of struggle, the state government finally responded and the Rajasthan Right to Information Act was passed in 2000. Finally, Freedom of Information Bill, 2000 was introduced and sent to a select committee. In 2002, the Hon’ble Supreme Court gave an ultimatum to the government. The bill was passed by the both the houses in December 2002 and finally received presidential assent on 2003. The first legislation for access to information was enacted and it came to be known as Freedom of Information Act, 2002. However, no date was mentioned in the Official Gazette for its operation. Parliamentary elections took place in 2004 and United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government came into force on May, 2004. It created a Common Minimum Programme?(CMP)?document ensuring to make the Right to Information Act more progressive. Within a few months, the UPA government established the National Advisory Council (NAC) under Mrs. Sonia Gandhi. Its purpose was to bring together experts and academics, as the government deem fit, and take their assistance in the formulation of government policies. Recommendations for the amendment of the Freedom of Information Act, 2000 were sent to the government by NAC. After several disagreements and debates between the NAC and NCPRI members, Parliament introduced the RTI Bill on 23rd December 2004. As the bill was pertinent only to the central government, the common people felt resented. In 2005, a revised bill was introduced with 150 alterations. It put both the central and the state government under its purview. In May 2005, the RTI bill was passed by both houses of the Parliament. It received Presidential assent on 15 June 2005 and finally came to force on October, 2005. The Indian RTI Act of 2005 is widely recognized as being among the most powerful transparency laws in the world and promises far greater transparency than what is prescribed or required by most international organizations.[8]

AMENDMENTS

Even before 2019, several attempts turned up to amend RTI. The first abortive attempt by the government was in 2006 and the second was in 2009. But people’s protests and campaigns drove them away. The Right to Information Bill, 2019 proposes changes in Section 13, Section 16, and Section 27 of the RTI Act. The said amendment envisages into the Central Government the power to decide the tenure, salary, allowances, and other T&C of service of the?Chief Information Commissioners and Information Commissioner at the Central and State level. This would adversely affect the independence of the CIC, SCIC and ICs as the Centre will now have the authority to decide the tenure, terms, and salaries of these officials.[9]

CONCLUSION

The right to know is a natural right of the people. It draws its power from Article 19(1)(a) and Article 21 of the Constitution. It enables citizens to enquire into the government policies and programmes. It provides accountability resulting in a responsible government and has the power to expose corruption at both local and central levels. Thus, the commencement of a bill that ensures this basic right to the people was necessary. It helped in deepening the democracy of the country. As we can see, the evolution of the RTI has shown how the pressures from the public can do wonders. The people succeeded in driving away the resistance by the bureaucracy. The recent amendments threaten the hard-won victory of the people. The Right to Information Bill, 2019 was passed in a haste, without proper discussion or consultation. It threatens the existing mechanism and would present a hurdle in the free flow of information.

REFERENCES

[1] Philippe C. Schmitter and Terry Lynn Karl,’ WHAT DEMOCRACY IS

. . . AND IS NOT’ (1991) NED < https://www.ned.org/docs/Philippe-C-Schmitter-and-Terry-Lynn-Karl-What-Democracy-is-and-Is-Not.pdf >

[2] Pankaj Kumar Dua,’ Democracy And The Law’(legalserviceindia) < https://www.legalserviceindia.com/articles/dl.htm >

[3] ‘Over 1.59 lakh RTI applications filed online in eight years, 11,376 by women: Personnel Ministry’ (The Hindu, NOVEMBER 18, 2021) <https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/over-159-lakh-rti-applications-filed-online-in-eight-years-11376-by-women-personnel-ministry/article37554632.ece>

[4] Prashant Sharma, The Right to Information Act in India:?The Turbid World of Transparency Reforms, (2012) CORE <https://core.ac.uk/reader/9994910>

[5] S.P. Gupta v President Of India And Ors [1981] AIR 1982 SC 149

[6] Mr. Kulwal v/s Jaipur Municipal Corporation [1986] AIR 1988 Raj 2, 1987 (1) WLN 134

[7] Stuti_98,’Evolution and Development of the Right to Information Act in India’ (legalservicesindia)<https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-323-evolution-and-development-of-the-right-to-information-act-in-india.html>

[8]Shekhar Singh,’ The Genesis and Evolution of the Right to Information Regime in India’ ECAJMER <https://ecajmer.ac.in/facultylogin/announcements/upload/Genesis%20and%20Evolution%20of%20the%20RTI%20in%20India.pdf>

[9] Simran Tandon and Anshu Singh, ‘The Toothless Monster, RTI Amendment Bill, 2019’ (Mondaq, 15 August 2019) <https://www.mondaq.com/india/white-collar-crime-anti-corruption-fraud/836770/the-toothless-monster-rti-amendment-bill-2019>